MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389203158 · doi:10.3390/sym15122130

Joint Model for Estimating the Asymmetric Distribution of Medical Costs Based on a History Process

2023· article· en· W4389203158 on OpenAlexaff
Simeng Li, Dianliang Deng, Yuecai Han, Dingwen Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueSymmetry · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistical Methods and Inference
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Regina
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsEstimatorParametric statisticsCovariateMathematicsStatisticsConsistency (knowledge bases)Applied mathematicsJoint probability distributionFunction (biology)Mathematical optimization

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we modify a semi-parameter estimation of the joint model for the mean medical cost function with time-dependent covariates to enable it to describe the nonlinear relationship between the longitudinal variable and time points by using polynomial approximation. The observation time points are discrete and not exactly the same for all subjects; in order to use all of the information, we first estimate the mean medical cost at the same observed time points for all subjects, and then we weigh these values using the kernel method. Therefore, a smooth mean function of medical costs can be obtained. The proposed estimating method can be used for asymmetric distribution statistics. The consistency of the estimator is demonstrated by theoretical analysis. For the simulation study, we first set up the values of parameters and non-parametric functions, and then we generated random samples for covariates and censored survival times. Finally, the longitudinal data of response variables could be produced based on the covariates and survival times. Then, numerical simulation experiments were conducted by using the proposed method and applying the JM package in R to the generated data. The estimated results for parameters and non-parametric functions were compared with different settings. Numerical results illustrate that the standard deviations of the parametric estimators decrease as the sample sizes increases and are much smaller than preassigned threshold value. The estimates of non-parametric functions in the model almost coincide with the true functions as shown in the figures of simulation study. We apply the proposed model to a real data set from a multicenter automatic defibrillator implantation trial.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.027
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.053

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.027
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0040.002
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.147
GPT teacher head0.405
Teacher spread0.259 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSymmetrySame topicStatistical Methods and InferenceFrench-language works237,207